Skip to main content
Glama

mdr_request_review

Request human review on markdown files to get inline comments. Start a new review with file paths or continue an existing session using the session ID.

Instructions

Open markdown files in mdr (md-redline) for human review, or continue an existing review session. To start a new review, pass filePaths. To continue after addressing a batch of comments, or to re-poll while the user is still reviewing, pass the sessionId from the previous result (without filePaths). If the result says the user has not finished yet, call again with the same sessionId to keep waiting. IMPORTANT: while this tool is waiting (no "batch" or "done" result has arrived yet, or you are between batches), you do not have permission to read, open, edit, or otherwise act on the files under review using other tools. The user is actively writing @comment markers into those files; reading them yourself will surface unsubmitted markers you must not address. Once a "batch" or "done" result arrives you may read/edit the files, but only to address the comments listed in that result — ignore any other @comment markers you encounter in the file.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filePathsNoAbsolute paths to markdown files to review (for new sessions).
enableResolveNoWhether to use the resolve workflow (open/resolved states).
sessionIdNoSession ID from a previous batch result. Pass this (without filePaths) to wait for the next batch of comments after addressing the previous batch.
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description comprehensively explains the workflow states (waiting, batch/done) and the critical constraint that during review the agent cannot read/edit files. No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden and does so excellently.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is fairly long but well-structured, front-loading the purpose and then providing detailed usage instructions. Every sentence appears necessary for clarity, though could be slightly more concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with complex workflow (polling, state constraints), the description is remarkably complete. It covers the workflow, permission constraints, and expected result types (batch, done, not finished). No output schema, but the description explains result interpretation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, baseline is 3. The description adds value by tying filePaths to new sessions and sessionId to continuation, and reinforces the relationship with enableResolve. It provides context beyond the parameter descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states that the tool opens markdown files for human review or continues an existing session. It specifies the resource (markdown files) and action (request review), with clear differentiation between new and continuation sessions.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit guidance on when to pass filePaths vs sessionId, and what to do if the user hasn't finished (call again with same sessionId). Warns about not acting on files during review, which is crucial for correct usage.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/dejuknow/md-redline'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server